CAT/C/46/D/369/2008 August 2003 for the militias that had clashed with Sassou-Nguesso’s government troops. In August 2008, UPADS held a party meeting in Brazzaville without any report of trouble or reprisals. Consequently, the State party maintains that the complainant has no objective grounds to expect any form of persecution because of his alleged membership of UPADS.3 4.4 With regard to the complainant’s claim that he worked for the CERDEC platform after he fled his home town, the State party emphasizes that it is difficult to imagine that the complainant would have immediately been able to work for an organization which, according to him, had just been established in Paris in December 1998. Moreover, the complainant spoke only in vague terms about his activities for CERDEC and mentioned only at the second hearing that his activities for CERDEC could place him in danger in the Congo. In his additional submission of 10 January 2009 to the Committee, the complainant says that a high-ranking member of CERDEC was arrested in December 2008. However, as he has not established his involvement or reputation as a political opponent, he cannot infer any personal risk from this fact. With regard to the identity documents of the complainant’s alleged brother, G.D.B., the State party maintains that the family name of the alleged brother, a political opponent, is different from the complainant’s family name and does not match that of the president of CERDEC Russia, G.D.B. The alleged brother’s handwritten attestation is not sufficient to establish a family relationship. 4.5 With regard to the allegations of persecution as a result of his activities for JE-PEU, the association that the complainant claims to have established in Côte d’Ivoire in 2000, the State party maintains that the signature on the memorandum of association is different from the complainant’s signature on the records of the hearings and that his name does not appear on the receipt issued by the Ministry of Interior. Moreover, the complainant’s account of the activities that he organized for CERDEC and the resultant threats are vague and evidently lack substance. Furthermore, the complainant claims to have been threatened by groups of Young Patriots, not by agents of the State. The State party therefore contends that it appears highly improbable that the complainant would be subjected to treatment which, in accordance with article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention, could be ascribed to persons acting in an official capacity. In addition, according to investigations carried out by the Swiss embassy in Abidjan, the complainant never mentioned his involvement in JEPEU or difficulties with Young Patriots. The State party maintains that the complainant has not plausibly established that he was a member of UPADS or that he was engaged in activities for CERDEC or JE-PEU; apart from that, the activities in which he claims to have engaged for them could not currently sustain a well-founded fear of persecution in the Congo or the Côte d’Ivoire. 4.6 The fact that UNHCR in Côte d’Ivoire recognized the complainant as a refugee is not evidence that he was individually persecuted in the Congo. According to the Swiss embassy in Abidjan, which the complainant does not challenge, he was recognized as a refugee because of the general situation in the Congo. 4.7 The State party underscores that the complainant has not substantiated his claim to be still engaged in political activities for his association, JE-PEU, in Switzerland, and there is no indication that such activities have been brought to the attention of the Congolese authorities or that they could lead to persecution by the authorities. The State party therefore submits that, all considered, nothing would indicate that there are substantial 3 GE.11-43871 Congo, Republic of the, 11 March 2008. See European Court of Human Rights decision of 28 June 2008 on the inadmissibility of application No. 25087/06, M. v. United Kingdom, in which the Court finds that the current situation in the Congo would not give a former employee and supporter of former President Lissouba cause to fear inhumane treatment if he were returned there. 5